managed. Teams may have changed the nature of the way employees are utilized to achieve results, but it has not undermined the traditional necessity in the corporate culture for effective leadership and top management. Despite the need for teams as an alternative to traditional corporate hierarchical functioning, there are many aspects of teams that need considered by top management in order to help insure that the effects of them are positive and not deleterious to overall company objectives. For example, teams are not easy to create. A great deal of thoughtful planning must be involved in their creation as well as the time for co-members to become adjusted with one another. Another important consideration is that teams do not represent a cure-all for any corporate objective that arises, “A team is not the best solution for any problem at any time. Doing teams right means ensuring that the problem cannot be better address by other means and that conditions – availability of people and time – support their creation” (Frohman 2).
Teams also exist outside of traditional corporate hierarchies and the status quo chain of command. Often they are not aligned with expectations already in place or established systems and methods. Measurement and control systems, standard job descriptions, reward and appraisal systems and promotion guidelines can also be incommensurable with groups. Perhaps one of the biggest misconceptions about teams that often causes their failure in the organization is the fact that they are not a self-directing entity, “There is nothing inherent in a team th
...